uv/chlorine aop for potable reuse: lower cost optionftp.weat.org/presentations/2016_a-14...
TRANSCRIPT
UV/Chlorine AOP for Potable Reuse: Lower Cost OptionKeel Robinson, North America Water Reuse Leader
June 15th, 2016
Water Reuse in TexasSan Marcos, TX
2
Agenda
AOP 101
UV-AOP for Potable Reuse
UV-AOP Design Considerations
First Full-Scale UV/Cl2 AOP Design
AOP 101
4
What is AOP?
Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) are technologies that
generate hydroxyl radicals (OH●)
The goal of an AOP technology is to maximize the production of
hydroxyl radicals (OH●) to provide fast reaction kinetics to most
efficiently destroy specific contaminants at the lowest possible cost
Technology and/or Chemicals OH●
OrganicCompounds
OH●
H2O
IntermediateCompounds H2O
OH●
CO2
5
Why Do We Need AOP?
Contaminant of Concern Typical Source Regulated?
1,4-Dioxane Solvent stabilizer, found in groundwater from past
industrial releases
Yes (some states)
NDMA Found in groundwater from past industrial releases,
or formed in wastewater plants
Yes (some states)
Atrazine Herbicide, found in surface water bodies from
agricultural runoff
Yes
MIB & Geosmin Taste & odor compounds found in drinking water
from algal blooms
No, but a nuisance to customers
Endocrine Disrupting Compounds
(EDCs)
Found in wastewater from human use No, but under consideration
Pharmaceutical and Personal Care
Products (PPCPs)
Found in wastewater from human use No, but under consideration
Industrial Micropollutants including
VOCs
Chlorinated Solvents, Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Fuel
Additives, Phenols
Yes
� Some compounds are not strippable, adsorbable, or biodegradable. Some of these compounds are
regulated (either at a federal level or state level) or are candidates for future regulations. AOP is often the
best solution to destroy these types of compounds of concern.
6
Common AOP Technologies
Excellent for a majority of AOP applications due to highly
efficient generation of hydroxyl radicals
Ideal for NDMA, excellent for low concentrations of
contaminants in RO effluent
Ozone + Peroxide
UV + Peroxide
At low pH, chlorine reacts with UV to create hydroxyl and
chlorine radicals. In some cases, may be more cost-
effective and implementable than peroxide.
UV + Chlorine
� ALSO, “OZONE” AND “OZONE WITH BIOLOGICALLY ACTIVE FILTRATION” CAN BEHAVE AS AN EFFECTIVE AOP
7
Typical AOP Applications (examples)
AOPAir
Stripper (optional)
Well From Contaminated
Aquifer
Groundwater Remediation/Wellhead Treatment (industrial micropollutants)
Granular Activated Carbon
(optional)
Disinfection
and AOP
FiltrationSedimentation
Drinking Water/Surface Water Treatment (taste & odor compounds)
AOPIndustrial
Wastewater Treatment
End of Pipe (industrial waste discharge, recalcitrant contaminants)
Potable Reuse (1,4-Dioxane, NDMA, CECs)
Reverse OsmosisMembrane
Filtration (MF, UF)Filtered
Secondary WW Effluent
AOP
UV-AOP for Potable Reuse
9
Why Do We Need UV-AOP for Potable Reuse?
Regulations for Indirect Potable Reuse
• California Groundwater Recharge Regulations (Full Advanced Treatment)
o Section 60320.201 (Requires Reverse Osmosis and Oxidation Treatment Process)
o 0.5 log removal of 1,4-Dioxane as an AOP surrogate because it partially passes through RO and is recalcitrant
• Big Spring, TX (TCEQ case-by-case)
NDMA
• Commonly found in tertiary wastewater and partially passes through RO
• California Notification Level (10 ng/l)
• UV-based AOP more effective than O3-based AOP at NDMA removal
Multiple Barrier Treatment
• Treatment redundancy to protect environment and human health
• Low molecular weight compounds (NDMA, 1,4-Dioxane, and CECs) pass through RO
• UV-based AOP provides pathogen barrier with maximum disinfection credit
10
Full Advanced Treatment Train
Indirect Potable Reuse (typical FAT)
Environmental
BufferUV AOP
Reverse
Osmosis
Membrane
Filtration
Secondary or
Tertiary
Effluent
� This treatment train is ideal for UV-based AOP because RO produces a high quality effluent � High UVT (>95%) reduces power demand of UV reactor
� Low DOC and alkalinity reduce scavengers, more efficient contaminant removal
� Other treatment trains are possible with oxidation processes such as Ozone or O3-BAF� Ozone-based processes are very effective at removing a majority of trace organic
contaminants (TOrCs)
� May be used as pretreatment to membranes and UV AOP
� May displace membranes and/or UV AOP
UV-AOP Design Considerations
12
Importance of Treatability Testing
Bench-Scale Testing
• Quick and inexpensive, great screening and preliminary
design tool
• Snapshot-in-time, but useful if water sample is representative
of design conditions
• UV Collimated Beam Testing
• Dose-response curves
Pilot-Scale Testing
• Optimize process under a range of real-life conditions
• Optimize equipment sizing variables
• Scale-up tool for full-scale design and performance guarantee
• Demonstration-scale for operators
• Regulatory and public acceptance
13
Dose-Response Curve
LOG reduction
(Pilot reactor)
Dose-response curve
(CBD-Test)
UV dose [J/m²]
Log r
educti
on
14
Design and Operation of UV Reactor: Dose vs. EED
tIDose *=][*
][
60 gpm
kW
Q
PEED =
UV Dose Setpoint Electrical Energy Dose (EED) Setpoint
Independently measured and verified through Collimated
Beam Testing
Does not directly measure UV output of lamps
Provide a common design basis for all manufacturers Specific to a reactor type
Can be used to scale up Difficult to scale unless same reactor used for both pilot-
scale and full-scale
Ensures regulatory compliance when using validated
dose equation (PSS) and on-line sensors
Good parameter for comparing power efficiency of
different UV reactors and different operating conditions,
but not measuring output of lamps
Allows for energy savings by turning down power to
lamps when conditions change
May waste energy when conditions change
15
Validate Performance With Collimated Beam Testing
RO
Permeate
Contaminant or
Surrogate Spiking
H2O2 or NaOCl
Pilot- or Full-Scale
UV Reactor
Collimated Beam
Testing Device
UV Dose and Log Removal Comparison
UV Dose may be calculated via Point Source Summation (PSS) Method
16
Why PSS for AOP Applications?
• PSS equation developed through extensive validation testing of UV reactors by 3rd party consultant
• PSS, CFD, and RED are different methods for calculating the average UV dose
• PSS accounts for real-time sensor inputs such as flow rate, UVT, and UV intensity
Flow Rate (MGD)
UVT (%)
PSS(mJ/cm2)
CFD (mJ/cm2) RED(mJ/cm2)
12 96 920 902 942
K143 12-17 (with 12 600W lamps per row, 17 rows)
PSS calculation method is validated by CFD and RED
17
UV Dose Control
PLC
S = UV intensity sensor reading (per row)
UVT = UV transmittance
Q = Flow Rate
INPUTS OUTPUTS
P = ballast power (same to each lamp)
Number of rows on
18
CBT Dose vs. PSS Dose
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
0 10
0
20
0
30
0
40
0
50
0
60
0
70
0
80
0
90
0
10
00
11
00
12
00
13
00
14
00
15
00
16
00
Lo
g R
ed
ucti
on
UV Dose mJ/cm2
LP UV/H2O2 AOP1,4-Dioxane Removal
CBT vs. Pilot-Scale UV Reactor5 ppm H2O2
PSS Dose from Pilot
Collimated Beam Dose
19
Upscaling and Sizing with UV Dose
� The reactor data and PSS model are validated using CBT data ideally
generated in parallel on site
� The reactor UV dose is calculated in real-time based on the measured
flow rate, UVT, and UV intensity
� The dose-response curve is used for upscaling using the same PSS
approach with full-scale reactor
20
UV/H2O2 AOP For Potable Reuse Has Been The Status Quo
• Has historically been the standard AOP technology for groundwater recharge/indirect potable reuse in California with multiple successful installations in operation today (e.g. Orange County, West Basin, WRD, Big Spring)
• Also used in drinking water for taste & odor and in groundwater remediation applications
• Hydrogen peroxide is relatively expensive and not readily used at WWTPs
• The photolysis of hydrogen peroxide is inefficient as only about 10% of the chemical is consumed in the UV AOP reaction; thus, incurring significant residual quenching costs
21
Introducing UV/Cl2 AOP
• Recent academic research shows that UV/Cl2 AOP is effective at low pH�Watts, M. & Linden, K., 2007. Chlorine Photolysis and Subsequent OH Radical Production During UV Treatment of Chlorinated Water. Water Res., 41:13:2871
�Watts, M., Rosenfeldt, E,. & Linden, K., 2007. Comparative OH Radical Production Using UV-Cl2 and UV-H2O2 Processes. Jour Supply Water Res Technol - AQUA., 56:8:469
�Watts et al. 2012. Low pressure UV/Cl2 for advanced oxidation of taste and odor. Journal-AWWA
• Reverse osmosis for FAT produces a low pH permeate (~5.5)
• Sodium hypochlorite (chlorine) is readily used at most WWTPs
• Use of sodium hypochlorite may result in significant life cycle cost savings relative to hydrogen peroxide
• Residual chlorine may be desirable for additional pathogen credit and/or secondary disinfection
• First greenfield full-scale system under construction by City of Los Angeles
22
UV/Cl2 AOP for Reuse – Chemistry Considerations
Chloramines and Breakpoint Reactions
� Residual chloramines may be present in RO
permeate prior to hypochlorite addition
pH and Chlorine Speciation
� Lower pH favors free chlorine in hypochlorous
acid form (slow hydroxyl radical scavenger)
� Higher pH shifts free chlorine to hypochlorite ion
form (rapid hydroxyl radical scavenger)
Disinfection by-product formation
� THMs/HAAs
� Chlorate
Target pH and free chlorine residual at inlet to UV reactor
Ref: Hach
Terminal Island Water Reclamation Plant
24
LASAN TIWRP AWPF AOP Design
• 5 MGD to 12 MGD expansion, converting
chloramination to comply with groundwater
recharge regulations
• 18 month bench and pilot scale study
including O3/H2O2, UV/H2O2, and
UV/HOCl led by LASAN, Trussell
Technologies, and Carollo Engineers
• Selected UV/HOCl based on performance
and life cycle costs
• Awarded AOP system to Xylem/Wedeco,
startup expected in late 2016
First Ever UV/Cl2 AOP Full-Scale Design
AOP Design Basis:� 3 to 12 MGD
� TOC < 0.25 mg/l
� UVT >96%
� CA Groundwater Recharge Regulations
AOP Specifications:� 6-log virus credit
� 0.5 log 1,4-Dioxane removal
� <10 ppt NDMA in effluent
� UV dose = 920 mJ/cm2
� Free chlorine dose = 2-4 mg/l
UV Dose is the design and operational basis, not EED
25
Wedeco MiPRO AOP Pilot System
� Containerized with climate control (HVAC), lighting, sink,
and refrigerator
� Fully automated with PLC and Operator Interface
� Remote Monitoring & Datalogging
� Can run operate in various modes of operation including
Ozone only, UV only, Ozone with Peroxide (AOP), UV
with Peroxide (AOP), and UV with Chlorine (AOP)
� State-of-the art instrumentation
26
Terminal Island Treatability Testing Objectives
12 month pilot study to compare 6 different AOPs
� UV LP + H2O2
� UV LP + NaOCl
� UV MP + H2O2
� UV MP + NaOCl
� Ozone + H2O2
� H2O2 + Ozone
27
Bench and Pilot Scale Results
28
Investment Decision: Chemical Savings
• $3.3M in chemical savings over 20 years
• NaOCl already on-site
• Additional pathogen barrier/credit with Cl2 for FAT
� UV/Cl2 AOP selected
29
Investment Decision: Real-Time Energy Savings
Q [gpm]
UVT [%]
UV Dose[mJ/cm2]
EED [kWh/1000gal]
Power Savings [%]
Log removal of 1,4-Dioxane
8333 98 920 0.194 28 >0.5
8333 97 920 0.230 14 >0.5
8333 96 920 0.268 0 >0.5
� UV Dose control reduces power usage
� Allows for variable power control to optimize power consumption and ensure regulatory compliance
30
Wedeco Full-Scale UV Reactor
• Wedeco K143 Series LP UV Reactor
• Validated for 6-log virus removal
• 12 lamps per row
• 17 rows of lamps
• 1 UV intensity sensor per row
• 600W lamps
• 34:1 linear power turndown
• Low headloss
• Add more rows for linear expansion
31
Acknowledgments on TIWRP Project
Roshanak Aflaki, Ph.D, P.E. ,
Plant Manager, Water Reclamation Division
Donald C. Tillman and Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant